4 ms·
Here's an excerpt of some Javascript found on the Amazon link: window.ue_ihb = (window.ue_ihb || window.ueinit || 0) + 1; if (window.ue_ihb === 1)
by randomdata 4y ago
Here's an excerpt of some Javascript found on the Amazon link:
window.ue_ihb = (window.ue_ihb || window.ueinit || 0) + 1;
if (window.ue_ihb === 1) {
var ue_csm = window,
ue_hob = +new Date();
(function(d) {
var e = d.ue = d.ue || {},
f = Date.now || function() {
return +new Date
};
e.d = function(b) {
return f() - (b ? 0 : d.ue_t0)
};
e.stub = function(b, a) {
Feel free to visit it to find the entire script. It is much too large to post here. What is a crawler learning from that program that would be lost if the equivalent code was bundled as WASM instead? Why couldn't its WASM parser pull out the same information? The JS/WASM runtime in the browser has to produce the same result regardless of which encoding is chosen, so everything will be encoded in there somehow.
- CharlieDigital 4y ago> Why couldn't its WASM parser pull out the same information There's currently no standard. If there's a will, there's a way. JSON+LD is the standard for JavaScript based metadata.
- randomdata 4y agoI don't get it. JSON+LD is not Javascript. It's not even spelled the same? If you are meaning that your Javascript is able to read JSON+LD, so too could you WASM in this hypothetical world we're talking about.
- CharlieDigital 4y agoJSON is literally JavaScript Object Notation, my friend.
- randomdata 4y agoWhich, humorously, isn't compatible with Javascript object notation. { foo: "bar" } is a valid Javascript object, but not valid JSON. Regardless, I don't get what you are trying to say. Pretty much every language still in existence is able to work with JSON (even SQL!). JSON is not Javascript. It's not clear why moving code from the Javascript runtime to the WASM runtime would magically make JSON+LD inoperable or whatever it is you are trying to say.